Sunday, March 20, 2005

Losing the touch to reality

This is something Libertarians, Rights and Objectivists claim the left is always doing, while dwelling in a notion of "good intentions". However, it is the Right and with them many Objectivists and Libertarians that lose their touch to objective reality.
I have seen them calling people, who remind them of the connection between the Iraq War and Corporate Warfare or that democracy might not be the same as liberty, liars, leftists and Saddamites. (a word made by Linz from

But isn't it the New Right (including thos right-wing Libertarians and Objectivists, who think that the USA has not suffered under George W. Bush) detached from objective truth and thus reality. More and more libertarians induldge themselves in the same "logical" mindgames as the Republican Right. Logic games are nice, but they have to be backed up with facts, which only can be found in this reality. And this is something that clearly speaks against them.
Let me draw the case, before you poke at me with the stick:

We have a president who thought that sacrificing the liberties of his peoples for protective means that are dubious (against terrorists, they have proven not to be good at all by several standard tests). This president also started two wars, one led against the Taliban and one lead against a secular dictator who wasn't even connected with the Al-Kaida. Now, while the first war might be justified and in all was a good thing (despite the problem with the clan-warfare), the second war certainly is a problem. Bush and his helpers used arguments that were unbelievable and just false (WMD, connection with Al-Kaida) to start and agitate the war. They afterwards justified the war with a reason that could have been accepted as the truth, if they had presented it as the only major reason before the war.
So, he sacrificed the lives of thousand American Soldiers for some alleged greater Democratic good of a nation that didn't want the US to help them. This is altruism in extreme measures and certainly nothing a Libertarian or an Objectivist should partake in.
The war didn't improve the situation at all. The democratic elections in the Iraq have brought a regime to power that is more interested in Theocracy and Iran than the western Democracies/Republics and the so-called Domino-effect has yet to be seen.
Also, there are more terrorists inside Iraq than were before the war and the blood-toll is rising. Now, the US companies (like Halliburton) try to prevent the privatisation of Iraq Oil wells, thus sanctionizing the idea of Corporate Warfare.

One argument, that no leftist, nor reasonable man could refute, said that Bush was above all consistent and true to his words like Regean. Well, this has been proven wrong now. After his first period in the White House, he know send of his Hawks to positions were they couldn't be dangerous (World Bank etc.). He also appeased not only Europeans, but also the Iran regime, which tries to develop a Nuclear Weapon. Bush even considered to give them materials to update their air force (which was subsided by US government a decade ago) and thus give them means to threaten Israel, in order to get the Mullahs of the Nuclear Programm. So, he also showed that he is neither consistent nor following any ideologie. Bush is a Realpoliticians of a category that hasn't been seen since Bismarck and he even stepped into the wake of Mr. Clinton in trying to solve the Middle East Palestinian problem.

So, what is in this to be worth defended by any Libertarian? I find not much and I don't think there is anything at all. George W. Bush is a threat to liberty in the world and at home. Remember the old saying that politicians try to shift importance from domestic to foreign affair, because the home stinks..


No comments: